[B-Greek] KOSMOS
Dave Smith (REL110, 211,212)
rel21x at charter.net
Fri Sep 1 17:45:20 EDT 2006
Some say that OIKOUMENH in this place reflects the Hebrew and Aramaic
'ERETZ, and is local in scope, as we and Israelis refer to the LAND [of
Israel]. I interpolate a proposed census at the time when Herod the Great
had been accused before Caesar of some of his many atrocities and had fallen
out of graces, as mentioned in Josephus. The census was only Herod's
territory and would determine if Herod could afford a little more support to
Augustus' coffers. Before his death, Herod came back into favor, so the
census or estimate did not produce an actual increase in Herod's due. In
either this case or the following census a decade or so later, it was not
the people who were being assessed, but the ruler of the land. In Roman
government, everything was for sale: the kingdom which included the Jewish
people and the office of high-priest. It could all be bought for a price
from the highest bidder.
Therefore, OIKOUMENA would be limited to Herod's kingdom in this passage
alone, as far as I know.
Dave Smith
Hudson,NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wounded Ego" <woundedegomusic at gmail.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 10:58
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] KOSMOS
> It does not appear obvious to me from Luke 2:1 how OIKOUMENH is being
> rendered anything close to "habitat" since in the context it seems that
the
> tax would be levied on the people within the land rather than on the land
> (because the people were required to leave their lands and provide
> biographical info).
>
> What IS abundantly clear from the text is that Caesar was a Democrat! "All
> the world should be taxed!" :)
>
> KJV
> Luke 2:
> 1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from
> Caesar Augustus, that all the world [THN OIKOUMENHN] should be taxed.
>
> I would think that in Luke 1, the sense is "the common people of the
land,"
> or "the populace," no?
>
> But again, I was not suggesting "habitat" or "stage" as a gloss for
KOSMOS,
> only showing that they echoed some of the sense of the context of KOSMOS,
at
> least in John and Paul. These served only to show the link to the
prevailing
> system/home as opposed to the vague gloss of "humanity in general" or the
> religion-specific definitions of "humanity in opposition to the god" or
> "humanity under the evil one."
>
> I contend that we should understand the OT/NT as standard Koine rather
than
> imposing religious meanings on words.
>
> For example, the NIV "translation" of SARX as "sinful nature" imposes a
> meaning on the word that would not be extant in Koine and greatly obscures
> the text. If we approach Koine with a license to redefine words to suit
our
> theological biases then where will we wind up? It seems to me that WYSIWYG
> is a fundamental hermeneutical principle (relevant to this list): "What
you
> see is what you get." Koine did not require modification. It works fine.
The
> first century language was not abandoned in favor of a vocabulary in a yet
> to be written glossary.
>
> I was troubled by KOSMOS (as used by John and Paul) because it seemed to
> violate that principle, but it was just my lack of appreciation of some
> elements of the word KOSMOS that I think I appreciate better now.
>
> William Ross
> VGB, Argentina
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad2 at mac.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 9:17 AM
> To: Wounded Ego
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] KOSMOS
>
> I honestly don't think "habitat" will do. While it is true
> that KOSMOS does in some instances correlate to "world" as
> the inhabited world, the standard ancient Greek term for
> "the inhabited world" is OIKOUMENH (e.g. Lk 2:1, for which see
> BDAG. That word is used 15x in the GNT. The sense of KOMOS, on
> the other hand, does correspond in its breadth of idiomatic usage
> to "world" in English, "monde" in French. As with many other Greek
> words used in the NT, it is appropriate to convey its sense as
> it appears in its context. Where it refers to "people generally"
> or "humanity" then it might be preferable to use one of those
> words/phrases as a gloss for KOSMOS in a specific passage. I think,
> however, that "world" is a standard English gloss for KOSMOS in
> Bible versions in English is that "world" covers much the same
> RANGE of denotations and connotations as the Biblical Greek word
> KOSMOS.
>
> There have occasionally been discussions about the inadequacies of
> BDAG or L&N with regard to treatment of a particular word, but I
> don't see the word KOSMOS as a word mishandled by them.
>
> E.g., here's BDAG's entry on KOSMOS -- just a listing of headings
> and sub-headings, without the examples cited for each usage:
>
> KOSMOS, OU, hO (Hom.+)
> 1. that which serves to beautify through decoration, adornment, adorning
> 2. condition of orderliness, orderly arrangement, order
> 3. the sum total of everything here and now, the world, the (orderly)
> universe, in philosophical usage
> 4. the sum total of all beings above the level of the animals, the world
> 5. planet earth as a place of inhabitation, the world
> a. generally
> b. the world as the habitation of humanity
> c. earth, world in contrast to heaven
> 6. humanity in general, the world
> a. generally
> b. of all humanity, but especially of believers, as the object of
> God?s love
> 7. the system of human existence in its many aspects, the world
> a. as scene of earthly joys, possessions, cares, sufferings
> b. the world, and everything that belongs to it, appears as that
> which is hostile to God, i.e. lost in sin, wholly at odds w. anything
> divine, ruined and depraved
> 8. collective aspect of an entity, totality, sum total
>
>
> On Friday, September 01, 2006, at 07:52AM, William Ross
> <woundedegomusic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I think KOSMOS has a lot in common with the word "habitat." I am
beginning
> >to get some images in my head, such as an aquarium. If fish in an
aquarium
> >used the word KOSMOS then they would never be referring to the tank
itself
> >(which was their "Universe") because they had no conception of that.
> Rather,
> >they would think of the picture on the back of the tank (their "sky") and
> >the arrangement of coral and the treasure chest and rocks, along with the
> >fish in the habitat. If, someone were to remove the picture from the back
> >and destroy the treasure chest and such and kill the fish, then the world
> >would be no more because the order was destroyed. If there were a new
> >pictu e and the treasure chest was remade as a pier, then that would be a
> >new world. Also, if a fish were first removed from the tank in a plastic
> bag
> >full of water, then replaced after the renewal, then he would live in a
new
> >world - even though he is once again in the same tank, with largely the
> same
> >props. This is because it is a different habitat - a different life
system.
> >
> >We see just this thing in 2 Peter 3:6
> >
> >4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers
> >fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the
> >creation.
> >5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the
> >heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the
> >water:
> >6 Whereby the world [KOSMOS] that then was, being overflowed with water,
> >perished:
> >7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are
kept
> >in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of
> >ungodly men.
> >
> >The KOSMOS is also like a theatrical stage set. As Shakespeare said, "All
> >the world is a stage." One could tear down the set and then create a new
> >world. Believers are on the stage but not part of the set - not part of
the
> >play.
> >
> >We also speak of "in my world" or "in his own world." Even in English
there
> >is this sense of arrangement that is different from "humanity in general"
> >and the anachronistic "universe."
> >
> >In John and Paul, the "habitat" is primarily characterized by the "moral
> >climate" and the ones who dictate the "rules" of the society.
> >
> >William Ross
> >VGB, Argentina
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> >[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Craig J
> >Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 10:18 PM
> >To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> >Subject: Re: [B-Greek] KOSMOS
> >
> >Carlton Winbery wrote:
> >> John 1:10 seems to me to be three distinct uses of KOSMOS.
> >>
> >> EN TWi KOSMWi HN, KAI hO KOSMOS DI' AUTOU EGENETO, KAI hO KOSMOS
> >> AUTON OUK EGNW.
> >>
> >> 1) alludes to him being part of humanity.
> >> 2) the universe
> >> 3) humanity apart from God
> >
> >I don't think such a strong and overly technical distinction is
necessary.
> A
> >straight forward reading could make them all the same, as in the
following
> >slight paraphrase:
> >
> >"He was in the world, and that world was made through him, and that world
> >did not know him"
> >
> >I guess KOSMOS would then equate to something like 'the mass of
humanity'.
> >I'm not sure why you have 'humanity' for 1 & 3, but need to change it to
> >'the universe' for 2 in between..?
> >
> >--
> >Craig Johnson
> >Brisbane, Australia
> >Blog Experiment: http://bloggledegook.blogspot.com/
> >
> >---
> >B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> >B-Greek mailing list
> >B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
> >
> >---
> >B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> >B-Greek mailing list
> >B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
> >
> >
>
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> cwconrad2 at mac.com
> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list